EQT | Earnings Review — Q2 2026

EQT missed on both headline lines in Q2 2026: adjusted EPS of $0.39 came in -4.9% below the $0.41 Zacks consensus, and headline revenue of ~$1.81B missed the ~$1.84B consensus by -1.4% — breaking a run of 10 straight beat-or-inline quarters (Q3 2023 through Q1 2026). The miss was entirely a realized-price story, not an execution problem: Henry Hub averaged just $2.89/MMBtu in the quarter, and CFO Jeremy Knop framed the quarter as beating expectations "across virtually every financial metric" apart from price. Sales volume told the opposite story — production of 634.5 Bcfe came in above the high end of guidance and grew +11.7% YoY, the fastest of the last four quarters, driven by compression-project base-decline outperformance so strong that management is "recalibrating" its own type-curve models. That operating strength drove a full-year 2026 production guidance raise of ~90 Bcfe at the midpoint (to 2,412.5 Bcfe, +3.8%) alongside a $25M cut to full-year capex — flipping the implied FY2026 production trajectory from a planned -2.4% YoY decline to +1.3% YoY growth, funded by efficiency, not incremental spend.

The financial picture underneath the raise is decelerating, not improving: adjusted EBITDA attributable to EQT grew only +3.3% YoY (down from +54.9% in Q1 2026) and adjusted EPS fell -13.3% YoY (down from +97.5% in Q1 2026) as the realized price fell -5.7% YoY — the sharpest single-quarter deceleration in both revenue and EPS growth across the entire 8-quarter window tracked (Task 4). Management's tone stayed uniformly upbeat throughout ("another outstanding quarter," "stacking up wins"), which is itself worth noting against the underlying price-driven margin compression.

Tone shift vs. Q1 2026: conservative/macro-dependent ("too early" to raise guidance, record framed around a hedge/weather windfall) → operationally-earned confidence with an active guidance raise and a pivot toward buybacks, since EQT is "on the doorstep" of its $5B net-debt target.

Contradictions (2 flagged): management's April framing that accelerating LNG exposure ahead of 2030 was "not much of an opportunity" priced at full market spread directly conflicts with the new 2028 LNG offtake deal announced this quarter, priced "at a similar cost to our term deals, rather than current market economics"; and an April statement that A&D odds were "significantly lower" sits in tension with the BlackLine Midstream acquisition closed this quarter and compared directly to Equitrans (see Contradictions section for the caveat on the second one).

Catalysts into Q3 2026 (next report ~2026-10-20): MVP Southgate construction completing by year-end with commercial terms still being negotiated; "at least one more, maybe more" power-demand supply deal before year-end following the new CPV agreement; Clarington-area (Ohio) egress project movement; and a management-flagged near-term gas-price soft spot into summer 2027 (Permian growth + super El Niño weather) that is already being hedged.

| Metric | Q3'24 | Q4'24 | Q1'25 | Q2'25 | Q3'25 | Q4'25 | Q1'26 | Q2'26 | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | Production (Bcfe) | 581.4 | 605.2 | 570.8 | 568.2 | 634.4 | 609.0 | 617.7 | 634.5 | | Production YoY % | — | — | +6.9% | +11.9% | +9.1% | +0.6% | +8.2% | +11.7% | | Realized price ($/Mcfe) | 2.38 | 3.01 | 3.77 | 2.81 | 2.76 | 3.44 | 5.08 | 2.65 | | Price YoY % | — | — | +17.1% | +20.6% | +16.0% | +14.3% | +34.7% | -5.7% | | Total operating revenue, GAAP ($M) | 1,283.8 | 1,624.7 | 1,739.9 | 2,557.7 | 1,958.6 | 2,388.1 | 3,378.7 | 1,809.9 | | Revenue YoY % | — | — | +23.2% | +168.6% | +52.5% | +47.0% | +94.2% | -29.2% | | Adj. EBITDA attrib. to EQT ($M) | 824.1 | 1,399.6 | 1,643.9 | 1,033.3 | 1,199.5 | 1,509.0 | 2,547.0 | 1,067.0 | | EBITDA YoY % | — | — | — | — | +45.6% | +7.8% | +54.9% | +3.3% | | Adj. EPS ($) | 0.12 | 0.69 | 1.18 | 0.45 | 0.52 | 0.90 | 2.33 | 0.39 | | Adj. EPS YoY % | — | — | +43.9% | NM* | +333.3% | +30.4% | +97.5% | -13.3% |

*Q2 2025's YoY is not meaningful — the prior-year base (Q2 2024 EPS of -$0.08) was near-zero/negative.

†"Total operating revenue, GAAP" includes non-cash derivative mark-to-market swings, which is why its YoY% (e.g. Q2'26: -29.2%) differs sharply from the cash-basis "Sales of natural gas, oil and NGLs" YoY% used in the Historical Performance section below (Q2'26: -5.3%). The cash-basis measure is the more reliable trajectory signal; see the methodology note under Historical Performance.

Verdict — operationally accelerating, financially decelerating on an easy comp roll-off. Production growth reaccelerated to +11.7% YoY, the best print of the last four quarters and the operational engine behind this quarter's guidance raise. But EBITDA and EPS growth cooled sharply (EBITDA +3.3% vs. +54.9% prior quarter; EPS -13.3% vs. +97.5% prior quarter) purely because Q1 2026 and Q2 2025 both benefited from unusually strong realized pricing that did not repeat — a base-effect story, not an operating one. EQT's quarterly earnings cadence remains commodity-price-driven, while the volume/cost trajectory that should compound through 2026-2029 (compression capex, MVP Southgate, new demand contracts) continues to strengthen.

5-year annual context (FY2021-FY2025):

| FY | Production (Bcfe) | YoY | Total revenue, GAAP ($M) | YoY | Adj. EBITDA ($M) | Margin | Adj. diluted EPS | YoY | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | FY2021 | 1,857.8 | — | 3,064.7 | — | 2,331.6 | 76.1% | -3.58 | — | | FY2022 | 1,940.0 | +4.4% | 7,497.7 | +144.6% | 3,522.6 | 47.0% | 4.38 | n/m | | FY2023 | 2,016.3 | +3.9% | 6,908.9 | -7.9% | 2,997.5 | 43.4% | 4.22 | -3.7% | | FY2024 | 2,228.2 | +10.5% | 5,273.3 | -23.7% | 3,728.6 | 70.7% | 0.45 | -89.3% | | FY2025 | 2,382.4 | +6.9% | 8,644.2 | +63.9% | 5,904.2 | 68.3% | 3.31 | +635.6% |

FY2024 was the post-Equitrans-integration trough (weak Henry Hub pricing); production has grown five straight years (2021-2025 CAGR ~6.4%), which is the more durable trend than the FY2025 easy-compare EPS/EBITDA surge above.

| Quarter | EPS Consensus | EPS Actual | Surprise | Result | |---|---|---|---|---| | Q3'24 | $0.05 | $0.12 | +140.0% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q4'24 | $0.50 | $0.69 | +38.0% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q1'25 | $1.02 | $1.18 | +15.7% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q2'25 | $0.44 | $0.45 | +2.3% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q3'25 | $0.41 | $0.52 | +26.8% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q4'25 | $0.73 | $0.90 | +23.3% | 🟢 BEAT | | Q1'26 | $2.23 | $2.33 | +4.5% | 🟢 BEAT | | ▶ Q2'26 (THIS QTR) | $0.41 | $0.39 | -4.9% | 🔴 MISS |

Q2 2026 vs. consensus — all available metrics:

| Metric | Consensus | Actual | Variance | Result | |---|---|---|---|---| | Adjusted EPS | $0.41 (Zacks) | $0.39 | -4.9% | 🔴 MISS | | Revenue (headline, total operating revenues) | ~$1.84B (Zacks) | ~$1.81B | -1.4% | 🔴 MISS | | Adjusted EBITDA attrib. to EQT | ~$1.08B (best public estimate, unreconciled) | $1,067.0M | ~-1.2% | 🟡 IN-LINE / slight miss | | Production (sales volume) | No consensus found; guidance was the operative benchmark | 634.5 Bcfe | Above guide high end | 🟢 Operational beat |

| Window | Beat rate | Pattern | |---|---|---| | L4Q | 3 Beat / 1 Miss = 75% | Q3'25, Q4'25, Q1'26 beat; Q2'26 miss | | L12Q | 9 Beat / 1 In-line / 1 Miss / 1 data gap = 75% (82% ex-gap) | 10 straight beat-or-inline quarters before this miss |

Magnitude trend: deteriorating into the miss. Beat size peaked at +23-27% in Q3-Q4 2025, compressed to +4.5% in Q1 2026, and turned negative (-4.9%) this quarter — a clean multi-quarter deceleration culminating in the first miss in over two years. Management's own commentary and the same-quarter guidance raise both point to a commodity-price cause (a low realized-gas-price quarter) rather than an execution or estimate-credibility problem, since production itself beat guidance by a wide margin.

FY2026 guidance — prior vs. new (issued 2026-07-21/22)

| Metric | Prior guide (Q1 2026 call) | New guide (Q2 2026 call) | Change | Management framing | |---|---|---|---|---| | FY2026 total sales volume | Mid 2,325 Bcfe (2,275-2,375) | Mid 2,412.5 Bcfe (2,375-2,450) | +90 Bcfe at midpoint (+3.8%) | Base-production outperformance from midstream compression "exceed[ing] even our upside forecast" | | FY2026 total capex | Mid $2.75B ($2.65B-$2.85B) | Mid $2.725B ($2.62B-$2.83B) | -$25M at midpoint | Capital efficiency from compression, not a growth cut | | MVP Southgate equity-method contributions | Mid ~$75M ($70-$80M) | Mid ~$160M ($150-$170M) | +$85M | Pulling $85M forward from 2027 to accelerate construction post-FERC authorization | | Q3 2026 total sales volume | Mid 595 Bcfe (guided at Q1 call, for Q2) | Mid 595 Bcfe (570-620) | Flat | Normal seasonal/curtailment cadence | | Q3 2026 total capex | Mid $782.5M | Mid $765M ($710-$820M) | -2.2% | Consistent with FY capital-efficiency trend |

Implied FY2026 YoY production growth (vs. FY2025 actual of 2,382.4 Bcfe): prior guide midpoint implied -2.4% YoY (a planned decline); the new guide midpoint implies +1.3% YoY — the raise flips the full-year trajectory from decline to growth, funded by efficiency rather than incremental capital (capex guidance moved down, not up).

FY2026 production guidance walk (Bcfe)

FY2026 capex guidance walk ($M)

Management tone — Q1 2026 call vs. Q2 2026 call

| Dimension | Q1 2026 call (2026-04-21) | Q2 2026 call (2026-07-22) | Shift | |---|---|---|---| | Overall tone | Record-focused but macro-dependent; leaned on Iran-driven gas shock and hedge gains | Operationally-driven confidence; records attributed to compression/base-decline execution | Less commodity-dependent | | Guidance posture | Explicitly conservative — "a little early to update" guidance | Explicit raise of ~90 Bcfe at the midpoint | Conservative to proactive | | Confidence on compression | Beat attributed to storm-uptime execution, not yet structural | "Original expectations... have been kind of blown away"; recalibrating hydraulic models | One-off beat to structural, repeatable driver | | Capital allocation | Debt paydown centered; buybacks a future option | "On the doorstep" of $5B net-debt target; buyback-ready, "countercyclical rather than procyclical" | Debt-first to buyback-ready | | Risk caveats | Macro framed as tailwind; little near-term softness discussion | New near-term risk flagged: Permian growth + super El Niño weather; hedged for summer 2027 | New explicit near-term caveat |

Net read: the guidance raise is a volume story, not a margin story — realized price fell YoY, EBITDA growth decelerated to +3.3% YoY (from +55% in Q1), and adjusted EPS fell YoY, even as management's public framing stayed uniformly positive.

EQT's fiscal year is calendar-year; Revenue = "Sales of natural gas, oil and NGLs" (Daloopa series 2090562), chosen over the GAAP headline line because it excludes non-cash derivative mark-to-market swings. EPS = adjusted EPS from continuing operations attributable to EQT (Daloopa series 2090896).

| Metric | Q3'24 | Q4'24 | Q1'25 | Q2'25 | Q3'25 | Q4'25 | Q1'26 | Q2'26 | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | Revenue ($M) | 1,099.8 | 1,641.2 | 2,244.7 | 1,700.5 | 1,677.6 | 2,103.9 | 3,439.9 | 1,610.0 | | Revenue YoY % | +9.8% | +20.3% | +72.2% | +91.2% | +52.5% | +28.2% | +53.2% | -5.3% | | Rev accel (bps QoQ) | +491 | +1,054 | +5,185 | +1,902 | -3,863 | -2,435 | +2,506 | -5,857 | | Adjusted EPS ($) | 0.12 | 0.69 | 1.18 | 0.45 | 0.52 | 0.90 | 2.33 | 0.39 | | EPS YoY % | -60.0% | +43.8% | +43.9% | NM* | +333.3% | +30.4% | +97.5% | -13.3% | | EPS accel (bps QoQ) | NM* | +10,375 | +15 | NM* | NM* | -30,290 | +6,702 | -11,079 |

*NM = not meaningful; Q3'24 and Q2'25 EPS bases involve near-zero or negative prior-year quarters. Treat the entire 2024-into-2025 EPS acceleration column as directionally noisy (a post-Equitrans-integration trough year, not a repeatable pattern) — the table above is retained for full disclosure rather than smoothed over.

Inflection points:

• Q1'25 to Q2'25 (peak, +91.2% YoY): the last leg of the 2024-trough-driven base-effect surge; acceleration peaked at +1,902bps QoQ.
• Q2'25 to Q3'25 (sharp deceleration, -3,863bps): the largest deceleration in the window prior to this quarter, as 2024 comps normalized.
• Q4'25 to Q1'26 (re-acceleration, +2,506bps to +53.2%): Winter Storm Fern and peak winter gas pricing drove the strongest quarter in the group.
• Q1'26 to Q2'26 (the key inflection): both revenue and EPS turn negative YoY for the first time in the window — revenue -5.3% (-5,857bps decel) and EPS -13.3% (-11,079bps decel), the sharpest deceleration of the entire 8-quarter series on both metrics simultaneously.

Plain-English assessment: EQT's growth spent 2024 into early 2026 riding a base-effect and cyclical-pricing wave, not a steady operating trend — 2025's YoY comps looked enormous largely because 2024 was a post-Equitrans-integration trough, then Q1 2026 layered on a genuine one-off tailwind (Winter Storm Fern). Q2 2026 is a normalization, not a breakdown: gas-price normalization ($2.89/MMBtu) is the main driver of the pullback, while production and cost execution kept beating guidance underneath it, and commercial deal-making (CPV, BlackLine, LNG offtake, MVP Southgate acceleration) continued to build a more durable, contracted demand base for the outer years.

| # | Catalyst | Timing | Read-through / status | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | MVP Southgate acceleration | Construction complete by year-end 2026; commercial start-up talks target 2027 (vs. prior mid-2028 plan) | All key regulatory approvals now in hand (FERC cleared Virginia facilities Mar. 2026, North Carolina Jun. 2026) — the main historical overhang is removed; remaining question is commercial-arrangement timing | | 2 | New power-demand gas supply deals (CPV, and more expected) | CPV: 10-yr, 325 MMcf/d, in-service early 2031; management guided to "at least 1 more, maybe more" before year-end | PJM-power-price-linked structure gives a material premium to local index pricing with no incremental capital; independent reporting shows two more large signed regional supply contracts already in place | | 3 | Ohio "Clarington" pipeline egress build-out (Borealis, PTTG) | Possible movement before year-end 2026; large-scale demand wedge concentrated 2029-2030 | Management calls this "ground zero" for the ~20 Bcf/d Appalachian demand pipeline; Boardwalk's Borealis project targeted a Q1 2026 FID, not independently confirmed as reached | | 4 | LNG portfolio ramp (new 2028 offtake + 2030 portfolio) | New 0.5 mtpa Asian offtake starts 2028; larger portfolio starts 2030; broader US LNG export wall of capacity 2026-2027 | Post-Iran-conflict tightening reversed management's own pre-conflict 2028-2030 glut view; EIA sees US LNG exports up ~30% by 2027 | | 5 | Net debt target ($5B) reached, buyback acceleration | "On the doorstep" of the target now | Management's own framing implies a more constructive capital-return story than reflected in guidance disclosed to date | | 6 | BlackLine Midstream acquisition | Closed this quarter (~$77M) | 20% base-case FCF yield, "essentially no incremental capital" — an Equitrans-style tuck-in playbook | | 7 | Compression program / production-beat trajectory | ~30 additional projects identified beyond the 6 executing this year, phased through 2029 | Drove this quarter's guidance raise; management is recalibrating its own base-decline models upward | | 8 | Near-term gas-price/hedging risk into summer 2027 | Flagged as the one soft spot in an otherwise bullish structural view (2028-2029 seen re-inflecting bullish) | Permian associated-gas growth + potential warm-winter risk; EQT is already hedging specifically into next summer | | 9 | Next earnings report | 2026-10-20 (Q3 2026) | Q3 2026 guided to 570-620 Bcfe / $710-820M capex |

Net read: three of nine catalysts (CPV/power deals, Clarington egress, MVP Southgate) sit in the same bucket the Street pressed hardest on in Q&A — execution and timing risk on the newer demand-side commercial deals — while the compression/production catalyst is the one with the cleanest evidence trail (a guidance raise, in-hand this quarter).

13 analysts, 25 question/follow-up exchanges on the Q2 2026 call; 21 well answered, 4 deflected/avoided.

| Analyst (Firm) | Topic | Verdict | |---|---|---| | Josh Silverstein (UBS) | Cash balance / buyback trigger level | 🟡 Well Answered (directional) | | Josh Silverstein (UBS) | LNG offtake sourcing detail | 🟢 Well Answered | | Doug Leggate (Wolfe) | Why grow at all vs. reallocate existing volumes | 🔴 Deflected/Avoided | | Doug Leggate (Wolfe) | Sustaining-capital improvement from compression | 🟡 Well Answered (unquantified) | | Betty Jiang (Barclays) | Competitive tension to fill new egress projects | 🟢 Well Answered | | Betty Jiang (Barclays) | CPV contract floor-price protection | 🔴 Deflected/Avoided | | Arun Jayaram (JPMorgan) | Right-to-win / permitting gating items on CPV | 🔴 Deflected/Avoided | | Arun Jayaram (JPMorgan) | Type-curve outperformance (+8% vs. type curve) | 🟢 Well Answered | | Sam Margolin (Wells Fargo) | MVP Southgate delivery-point dynamics (Zone 5 demand) | 🟢 Well Answered | | Sam Margolin (Wells Fargo) | LNG market glut vs. tightening evolution | 🟢 Well Answered — quantified (Henry Hub–JKM spread, European storage levels) | | Neil Mehta (Goldman Sachs) | Hedging strategy / opportunism | 🟢 Well Answered | | Neil Mehta (Goldman Sachs) | M2 basis conviction through the curve | 🟢 Well Answered | | Phillip Jungwirth (BMO) | Risking the Slide 22 demand wedge / partner criteria | 🟢 Well Answered | | Phillip Jungwirth (BMO) | Upper limit on Appalachia supply growth | 🟢 Well Answered | | Neal Dingmann (William Blair) | Data-center "token spread" upside participation | 🟢 Well Answered | | Neal Dingmann (William Blair) | Reinvestment rate / M&A read-through | 🟡 Well Answered (reframed) | | Gabe Daoud (Truist) | Monarch Campus / Prosperity Gas Line status | 🔴 Deflected/Avoided | | Gabe Daoud (Truist) | BlackLine Midstream strategic rationale | 🟢 Well Answered | | Gabe Daoud (Truist) | MVP Southgate in-service acceleration to 2027 | 🟢 Well Answered | | James West (Melius) | Capital-allocation balance across midstream/M&A/buybacks | 🟡 Well Answered (directional) | | Bob Brackett (Bernstein) | Limits to lateral-length growth | 🟢 Well Answered | | Jacob Roberts (TPH) | CPV-style fixed-premium vs. power-indexed contract mix | 🟢 Well Answered | | Jacob Roberts (TPH) | Compression capex runway / maintenance capital | 🟢 Well Answered | | Kevin MacCurdy (Pickering) | Timing of price reaction to the demand wedge | 🟡 Well Answered (qualitative) | | Kevin MacCurdy (Pickering) | Key projects to watch for 2029-2030 demand wedge | 🟢 Well Answered |

Net read: management was direct and quantitative on production, cost, and hedging questions, but three of the four deflections cluster tightly around the newer power/data-center demand deals (CPV floor price, CPV permitting/gating items, Monarch Campus status) — the area where the Street is most focused on execution risk. The fourth (Doug Leggate's "why grow vs. reallocate" question) was reframed into a general demand-capture narrative rather than rebutted directly.

No other direct contradictions were identified across all 8 available transcripts (Q3 2024-Q2 2026). Areas checked and found to be consistent evolutions, not contradictions: the shift from "largely unhedged" (Q1 2026) to layering in summer-2027 hedges (Q2 2026); the FY2026 production guidance raise, which Knop had explicitly flagged as likely mid-year timing back in Q1; and the MVP Southgate capital acceleration, which followed directly from receiving FERC authorization that quarter.

Macro commentary:

• Natural gas price: realized Q2 gas prices averaged just $2.89/MMBtu, yet EQT still generated $330M of FCF attributable to EQT — management frames this as proof of low-cost-curve positioning. A near-term soft-spot risk was flagged for summer 2027 (Permian associated-gas growth + potential super El Niño weather), already being hedged against.
• LNG / geopolitical: management explicitly linked the Iran conflict to a tightening global LNG market — a pre-conflict view of a 2028-2030 glut is "gone away." Europe gas storage is >10% below year-ago levels; international spot prices are above $17; the Henry Hub-to-JKM 2028 spread has widened over $2 since the conflict began.
• Industrial/power demand: management sized the Appalachian opportunity at over 45 demand/pipeline-takeaway projects totaling nearly 20 Bcf/d, risking it internally to a "high single digit Bcf/d" realistic estimate — the dominant macro theme of the call.

Companies mentioned:

| Company / entity | Relationship to EQT | Read-through | |---|---|---| | Competitive Power Ventures (CPV) | New customer — 10-yr, 325 MMcf/d, PJM-power-linked supply deal | Bullish, zero incremental capital; confirms accelerating gas-fired power buildout in Appalachia | | "Monarch Campus" data-center operator (unconfirmed) | Prospective customer | Bullish but unconfirmed — EQT in discussions, timing/construction status not confirmed by EQT directly | | BlackLine Midstream | Acquisition target, closed this quarter (~$77M) | Bullish, EQT-specific — monetizes an existing supply relationship at a 20% base-case FCF yield | | Unnamed large Asian integrated energy company | New LNG offtake customer (0.5 mtpa from 2028) | Mixed: bullish for EQT (~$45M 2028 FCF uplift at favorable pricing), but counterparty's tariff-related motivations are a reminder of trade-policy friction shaping Asian LNG contracting | | Permian-basin producers (competing supply basin) | Competitor | Bearish, near-term, for Appalachian gas pricing broadly — one of two cited reasons (with weather) for a short-term soft spot | | Haynesville-basin producers (competing supply basin) | Competitor | Bearish for Haynesville growth capacity; bullish read-through for EQT, since management believes roughly a third of ex-EQT Appalachian peer supply will struggle to hold flat by decade-end | | Clarington-area pipeline projects (Borealis, PTTG) / Duke Energy (via MVP Southgate) | Demand-side projects / end customer | Bullish — identified as the next visible re-rating catalyst for Appalachian basis and Carolinas supply reliability |

Data sourced from Daloopa (company_id 1189), EQT's Q1 2026 and Q2 2026 earnings-call transcripts, and public post-earnings coverage (Zacks Consensus Estimate, via Yahoo Finance/TradingView/Nasdaq/GuruFocus syndication) for consensus figures not carried by Daloopa.